Promotion to CPT while in an 18A slot

July 30th, 2013, 01:48 PM

I'm currently on PCS orders at Fort Bragg for CCC/SFQC. I'm occupying an 18A/CPT slot in the MDARNG but I'm obviously not an 18A yet (11A currently). My name is on the CPT list that was just published a couple of weeks ago, but because I'm not qualified in the MOS for my slot I am not considered promotable. As a result, I will be stuck as a 1LT throughout the duration of my training here (~24 months) which has a huge impact on my pay since my only income right now is my active duty paycheck.

Yes, I know "that's the way it works." But this is obviously not the way it should work, at least in the case of NG soldiers in SFQC. I have already been told that MD is over strength on 11A CPTs so I can't hide in another slot for promotion purposes.

My question: who has the authority to override this policy and issue promotion orders? If they will not play ball, what is the next step? IG complaint? Letters to state representatives?

What would be the basis of your IG complaint? While the situation is not advantageous to you personally, your State is indeed following law and regulation.

Another message has mentioned that your State G1 could put you in a branch immaterial slot, which would indeed make you promotable. Several unintended consequences from that action could result in you losing the school seat. You face a less-than-ideal situation, but I don't have any advice for you to solve the problem without threatening your place at SFQC.

What would be the basis of your IG complaint? While the situation is not advantageous to you personally, your State is indeed following law and regulation.

Sure they are, but violations of a regulation aren't a prerequisite to IG involvement. I filed an IG complaint six years ago when my request to attend AOCS was denied. The OCS cadre hadn't violated any regulations, but I felt that the denial was totally baseless and rooted in the senior TAC's personal dislike for me. An hour after I made the call, they changed their tune and cut my orders. In essence, I'd simply explain my situation to the IG, and assuming that they agreed that in this case the regulation was resulting in an undesirable (for the Army, not just for me) outcome, they would (hopefully) call and advise the commander at the level necessary to override the offending policy. Or maybe they wouldn't. Worst case scenario is I get stuck as a 1LT, which...is exactly where I stand right now.

Another message has mentioned that your State G1 could put you in a branch immaterial slot, which would indeed make you promotable. Several unintended consequences from that action could result in you losing the school seat. You face a less-than-ideal situation, but I don't have any advice for you to solve the problem without threatening your place at SFQC.

I don't think any are available right now. But how would that cause me to lose a school seat that's already been reserved in ATRRS? I'm already on active duty orders at Fort Bragg. My unit has used branch immaterial slots in the past to promote their officers while they're in school, but none are open at this time.

Does anyone know who has the authority to override the policy that is responsible for this mess? Yes, I know they won't listen. I don't care. I'm going to write them anyway.

Thanks.

Comment

An IG complaint isn't going to work. For AOCS, it was probably more to get rid of you then anything. They would have to actually violate a regulation for you to have a sustained complaint. LTC Ritchis is saying if you're pulled out of your unit and placed in another unit, you may loose the funding for those orders as you're no longer assinged to a SF Group.

Another option, find out if you actually have to be an 18A to be promoted. I know when I was promoted to CPT, I was in a 90A slot not a 13A/31A slot which I was qualified in.

An IG complaint isn't going to work. For AOCS, it was probably more to get rid of you then anything. They would have to actually violate a regulation for you to have a sustained complaint. LTC Ritchis is saying if you're pulled out of your unit and placed in another unit, you may loose the funding for those orders as you're no longer assinged to a SF Group.

Another option, find out if you actually have to be an 18A to be promoted. I know when I was promoted to CPT, I was in a 90A slot not a 13A/31A slot which I was qualified in.

Well, the OSM is telling me (as has everyone else, to include other 18As who were in the same situation as well as the AGR staff at my unit) that it's only going to happen if I'm in a slot I'm qualified for.

That's interesting about the orders, but in the past the branch-immaterial slot method has been used so I don't foresee that being an issue. However, the nonavailability of such slots is an issue. Thanks though.

Consider the following macroscopic view of the situation and abstract away all the regulatory "stuff" that imposes it. Had I simply stayed in NJ like the rest of my peers, I would be getting promoted to Captain right now. However, because I attended SFAS and was selected to attend SFQC, I am now non-promotable. Again: because I chose to do something more difficult than what my peers are either willing to do or are capable of doing, I am effectively being penalized.

This does not happen on active duty because there is no concept of "slots." This is strictly an artifact of NG policy that was intended to keep officers who did not pursue their required OES from being promoted (unless I am mistaken, in which case I'd like to know what the policy was, in fact, intended to accomplish). Do you believe that it is correct and just that I be stuck at the rank of Lieutenant as a result of being selected for Special Forces? If so, I'm genuinely curious as to your rationale, because this seems simply preposterous to me. But I'm certainly open to correction.

I don't consider this a "mess" because the system is working as designed. Whether I think this regulation is a good idea is a separate question. As Microsoft might say, "it's not a bug, it's a feature."

The point of the regulation in question is to provide a level of rigor and accountability to our personnel systems, so we don't promote personnel not qualified in their jobs.

Active component officers face a different situation, owing to their component's different force structure, personnel accounting, and legal authorities. They have a TTHS account that they use to manage the Soldiers in transition from one status to another. The Guard has no TTHS account as such (although I argued for this when I was at Bureau), although we have certain aspects of it (e.g., the RSP "units"). In all fairness I do recognize that the management of such an account would be a personnel accounting headache, and could cause as many problems as it solves.

I've been out of the officer personnel game too long to know whether there's a PPOM or some existing policy update that addresses your situation.

This does not happen on active duty because there is no concept of "slots."

If that's so, why is there no analogous policy for active duty officers?

While we're at it, does anyone happen to know the actual regulation that governs this?

LT, can you expand on the bolded?

Because no the contrary (at least in the Warrant world), slotting is important for your promotion potential. I have come across five warrants that were passed over because they did not work in their requisite positions or served too long in a position (considered homesteading) that was detrimental to their promotions. Also, average and subpar OERs (which I only can assume) could have played a factor.

Because no the contrary (at least in the Warrant world), slotting is important for your promotion potential. I have come across five warrants that were passed over because they did not work in their requisite positions or served too long in a position (considered homesteading) that was detrimental to their promotions. Also, average and subpar OERs (which I only can assume) could have played a factor.

I would imagine all of that would factor into their DA promotion board decision. What you've described doesn't appear at first glance to be the same problem that the lieutenant is facing.

The AC does not face the same geographic challenge as the ARNG. We can't really promote a Virginia Guardsman into a vacant slot in Oregon; whereas if the AC has a vacancy in Korea the AC can promote someone and PCS him there from Germany to fill the slot.